Interdict

(Latin interdictum, from inter
and dicere).

Originally in Roman law, an
interlocutory edict of the praetor, especially in matter affecting
the right of possession; it still preserves this meaning in both
Roman and canon law. In present ecelesiastical use the word
denotes, in general, a prohibition. In addition to the definite
meaning it has when referring to the object of this article, the
term is often loosely employed in a wider and rather untechnical
sense. We speak of a priest, a church, or a practice of devotion
being interdicted, to denote a suspended priest, one who either by
canon law or by the stricture of his ordinary is forbidden to
exercise his sacerdotal functions, a church building that has been
secularized, or one in which Divine service is temporarily
suspended, because the edifice has incurred "pollution"
or lost its consecration, finally, extraordinary practices of
devotion are said to be interdicted. But, strictly speaking,
interdict is applied only to persons and churches affected by the
penal measure or censure called "interdict", and it is
exclusively in this sense of the word that the subject is treated
here. After explaining its nature and effects we shall mention the
interdicts in force by common canonical law.

An interdict is a censure, or
prohibition, excluding the faithful from participation in certain
holy things. These holy things are all those pertaining to
Christian worship, and are divided into three classes:

the Divine offices, in other
words the Liturgy, and in general all acts performed by clerics
as such, and having reference to worship

the sacraments, excepting
private administrations of those that are of necessity;

ecclesiastical burial, including
all funeral services.

This prohibition varies in degree,
according to the different kinds of interdicts to be enumerated:

First, interdicts are either local
or personal; the former affect territories or sacred
buildings directly, and persons indirectly; the latter directly
affect persons. Canonical authors add a third kind, the mixed
interdict, which affects directly and immediately both persons and
places; if, for instance, the interdict is issued against a town
and its inhabitants, the latter are subject to it, even when they
are outside of the town (arg. cap. xvi, "De sent. excomm."
in VI). Local interdicts, like personal interdicts, may be general
or particular. A general local interdict is one affecting a
whole territory, district, town, etc., and this was the ordinary
interdict of the Middle Ages; a particular local interdict is one
affecting, for example, a particular church. A general personal
interdict is one falling on a given body or group of people as a
class, e.g. on a chapter, the clergy or people of a town, of a
community; a particular personal interdict is one affecting
certain individuals as such, for instance, a given bishop, a given
cleric. Finally, the interdict is total if the prohibition
extends to all the sacred things mentioned above; otherwise it is
called partial. A special kind of partial interdict is that
which forbids one to enter a church, interdictum ab ingressu
ecclesiae mentioned by certain texts. Omitting the mixed
interdict, which does not form a distinct class, we have
therefore:

the general local interdicts;

particular local interdicts;

general personal interdicts;

particular personal interdicts;

prohibitions against entering a
church. We may add

the prohibition obliging the
clergy to abstain from celebrating the Divine offices, cessatio
a divinis, a measure somewhat akin to a particular local
interdict, only that it is not imposed on account of any crime on
the part of those whom it affects.

This short account shows us that
under the same name are grouped penal measures rather different in
nature, but having in common a prohibition of certain sacred
things. Interdict differs from excommunication, in that it does
not cut one off from the communion of the faithful or from
Christian society, though the acts of religion forbidden in both
cases are almost identical. It differs from suspension also in
this respect: the latter affects the powers of clerics, inasmuch
as they are clerics, while the interdict affects the rights of the
faithful as such, and does not directly affect clerics as such but
only as members of the Church. Of course, it follows that the
clergy cannot exercise their functions towards those under
interdict, or in interdicted places or buildings, but their powers
are not directly affected, as happens in case of suspension; their
jurisdiction remains unimpaired, which allows of a guilty
individual being punished, without imperilling the validity of his
acts of jurisdiction. This shows that an interdict is more akin to
excommunication than to suspension.

Whereas excommunication is
exclusively a censure, intended to lead a guilty person back to
repentance, an interdict, like suspension, may be imposed either
as a censure or as a vindictive punishment. In both cases there
must have been a grave crime; if the penalty has been inflicted
for an indefinite period and with a view to making the guilty one
amend his evil ways it is imposed as a censure; if, however, it is
imposed for a definite time, and no reparation is demanded of the
individuals at fault, it IS inflicted as a punishment.
Consequently the interdicts still in vogue in virtue of the
Constitution "Apostolicae Sedis" and the Council of
Trent are censures; whilst the interdict recently (1909) placed by
Pius X on the town of Adria for fifteen days was a punishment.
Strictly speaking, only the particular personal interdict is in
all cases a perfect censure, because it alone affects definite
persons, while the other interdicts do not affect the individuals
except indirectly and inasmuch as they form part of a body or
belong to the interdicted territory or place. That is also the
reason why only particular personal interdicts, including the
prohibition to enter a church suppose a personal fault. In all
other cases, on the contrary, although a fault has been committed,
and it is intended to punish the guilty persons or make them
amend, the interdict may affect and does affect some who are
innocent, because it is not aimed directly at the individual but
at a moral body, e. g. a chapter, a monastery, or all the
inhabitants of a district or a town. If a chapter incur an
interdict (Const. "Apost. Sedis", interd., n. 1) for
appealing to a future general council, the canons who did not vote
for the forbidden resolution are, notwithstanding, obliged to
observe the interdict. And the general local interdict suppressing
all the Divine offices in a town will evidently fall on the
innocent as well as the guilty. Such interdicts are therefore
inflicted for the faults of moral bodies, of public authorities as
such, of a whole population, and not for the faults of private
individuals.

Who have the power of imposing an
interdict, and how does it cease? In general, the reader may be
referred to CENSURES, ECCLESIASTICAL, and Excommunication. We
shall add a few brief remarks.

Any prelate having jurisdiction in
foro externo can impose an interdict on his subjects or his
territory. It may be provided for in the law and then, like other
censures (q.v.), can be ferendae or latae sententiae.
A particular personal interdict is removed by absolution, other
interdicts are said to be "raised", but this does not
imply any act relative to the individuals under interdict; when
imposed as a punishment these interdicts may cease on the
expiration of a definite time.

(1)General local interdict

A general local interdict is —
for a whole population, town, province, or region — the
almost complete suspension of the liturgical and sacramental
Christian life. Examples of it exist as early as the ninth
century, under the name of excommunication (see in
particular the Council of Limoges of 1031). Innocent III gave this
measure the name of interdict and made vigorous use of it.
It will suffice to recall the interdict imposed in 1200 on the
Kingdom of France, when Philip II Augustus repudiated Ingeburga to
marry Agnes of Meran; and that on the Kingdom of England in 1208,
to support the election of Stephen Langton to the See of
Canterbury against John Lackland, which lasted till the submission
of that king in 1213. It was a dangerous weapon, but its severity
was mitigated little by little, and at the same time it was less
frequently employed. The last example of a general interdict
launched by the pope against a whole region seems to have been
that imposed by Paul V in 1606 on the territory of Venice, it was
raised in the following year. A quite recent example of a general,
local, and personal interdict, but of a purely penal nature, is
the interdict placed by Pius X on the town and suburbs of Adria in
Northern Italy, by decree of the Sacred Congregation of the
Consistory, on 30 September, 1909, to punish the population of
Adria for a sacrilegious attack made on the bishop, Mgr. Boggiani,
in order to prevent him from transferring his residence to Rovigo.
The interdict was to last for fifteen days, and contained the
following provisions: "Prohibited are: (a) the celebration of
the Mass and all other liturgical ceremonies; (b) the ringing of
bells; (c) the public administration of the sacraments; (d) solemn
burial. The following alone are permitted: (a) the baptism of
children, the administration of the other sacraments and of the
Viaticum to the sick, (b) the private celebration of marriages;
(c) one Mass each week for the renewal of the Holy Eucharist."
It was recalled that the violation of this interdict constitutes a
mortal sin for all and imposed an irregularity on clerics (Acta
Ap. Sedis, 15 Oct., 1909, p. 765).

To return to the subject of a general
local interdict, but non-personal in kind, the law authorizes the
private celebration of Mass and the choir office, the doors of the
church being closed (c. lvii, "De sent. exc.", and c.
xxiv, eod. in VI), and also the administration of confirmation; on
the other hand canonical authors did not allow extreme unction for
the sick, but Pius X permits it. To these relaxations must be
added the exceptions made in time of interdict for the celebration
of the great feasts of Christmas, Easter, Pentecost, the
Assumption, Corpus Christi, and its octave.

(2)The particular local interdict

The particular local interdict has
the same effects, but they are limited to the interdicted place or
church. The above-mentioned mitigations, however, are not allowed.
Whoever knowingly celebrates or causes to be celebrated the Divine
offices in an interdicted place incurs ipso facto the
prohibition against entering the church until he has made amends
(Const. Ap. Sedis, interd., n. 2); and any cleric who knowingly
celebrates any Divine office in a place interdicted by name
becomes irregular (C. xviii, "De sent. excomm." in VI),
but not if he administers a sacrament to an interdicted
individual, as the law has not legislated for such a case.

(3) The general personal interdict

The general personal interdict,
which, we have seen, may be combined with the local interdict, has
the same effects for all the persons who form or will form part of
the group, community, or moral person under interdict: all the
canons of a chapter, all the religious of a convent, all the
inhabitants of a town, all those domiciled in the place, etc.
They, however, escape from the interdict who are not members or
who cease to be members of the body affected, e. g. a canon
appointed to another benefice, a stranger who leaves the town,
etc. But the mere change of locality has no liberating effect, and
the interdict follows the individual members of the body wherever
they may go.

(4) The particular personal
interdict

The particular personal interdict,
which is a real censure, affects individuals much in the same way
as excommunication. They may not assist at the Divine offices or
at Mass, and if they are interdicted by name they should be put
out, however, if they refuse to withdraw it is not necessary to
suspend the service since, after all, the interdict does not
deprive them of the communion of the faithful. They may not demand
to receive the sacraments, except Penance and the Viaticum, and it
is not lawful to administer them. They are to be deprived of
ecclesiastical burial, but Mass and the ordinary prayers may be
said for them. A cleric violating the interdict becomes irregular.

(5) The interdict against entering
the church

The interdict against entering the
church is a real censure, intended to bring about the amendment of
the erring one; it prohibits him from taking part in Divine
service in the church and from being accorded a burial service in
it. But outside the church he is as if he had not incurred any
censure, he can attend Divine service and receive the sacraments
in a private oratory and pray in the church when service is not
being held in it. The individual is absolved after due
satisfaction for his fault.

(6) The cessation from Divine
service

The cessation from Divine service,
cessatio a divinis, follows the rules of the local
interdict, from which it differs, not in its effects, but only
because the fault for which it is imposed is not the fault of the
clerics who are prohibited from celebrating the Divine service. It
forbids the holding of Divine service and the administration of
the sacraments in a given sacred place. It is a manifestation of
sorrow and a kind of reparation for a grievous wrong done to a
holy place. This cessatio a divinis is not imposed ipso
facto by the law; it is imposed by the ordinary when and under
the conditions that he judges suitable.

There are five interdicts latae
sententiae, two of which are mentioned in the Constitution
"Apostolicae Sedis", two decreed by the Council of
Trent, and one added by the Constitution "Romanus Pontifex"
of 23 August, 1873:

"Universities, colleges,
and chapters, whatsoever be their name, that appeal from the
ordinances or mandates of the reigning Roman pontiff to a future
general council, incur an interdict specially reserved to the
Roman pontiff." This interdict is imposed for the same crime
as the specially reserved excommunication no. 4 [see
EXCOMMUNICATION, VII, A, (a)], but the excommunication falls on
the individuals, and the interdict on the group, or moral
persons, by whatever name they be called, and who cannot be
excommunicated as such.

"Those who knowingly
celebrate or cause to be celebrated the Divine offices in places
interdicted by the ordinary or his delegate, or by the law; those
who admit persons excommunicated by name to the Divine offices,
the sacraments of the Church, or to ecclesiastical burial, incur
pleno jure the interdict against entering the church,
until they have made amends sufficient in the opinion of him
whose order they have contemned." This interdict,which is
borrowed, except for a few minor modifications, from c. viii, "De
privilegiis", in VI of Boniface VIII, is therefore reserved
to the competent prelate. Its object is to ensure the observance,
on the one hand, of the local interdict, and, on the other, of
excommunication by name (see EXCOMMUNICATION, vol. V, p. 680,
subtitle Vitandi and Tolerati).

The Council of Trent (Sess. VI,
cap. i, "De Ref.") imposes on bishops the duty of
residence; it prescribes that those who absent themselves without
a sufficient reason for six continuous months are to be deprived
of a quarter of their annual revenue; then of another quarter for
a second six months' absence; after which, the council continues,
"as their contumacy increases . . . the metropolitan will be
bound to denounce to the Roman pontiff, by letter or by
messenger, within three months, his absent suffragan bishops, and
the senior resident suffragan bishop will be obliged to denounce
his absent metropolitan, under penalty of interdict against
entering the church, incurred eo ipso. The obligation of
denouncing begins, therefore, only after an entire year's
absence, and the interdict is incurred only if the denunciation
has not been made within the next three months.

The Council of Trent (Sess. VII,
cap. x, "De Ref.") forbids chapters, during the vacancy
of a see, to grant dimissory letters within a year dating from
the vacancy, unless to clerics who are arctati, i.e.
obliged to obtain ordination on account of a benefice; this
prohibition carries with it the penalty of interdict. The Council
of Trent having later (Sess. XXIV, cap. xvi, "De Ref.")
obliged the chapter to name a vicar capitular within eight days,
the interdict can be incurred by the chapter only for dimissory
letters granted during these eight days. It is disputed whether
or not the vicar capitular would incur the interdict for this
fault (Pennacchi in Const. "Ap. Sedis", IT. 469).

The Constitution "Romanus
Pontifex" aims at preventing those who are elected by the
chapters or named by the civil authorities from undertaking the
administration of their church under the name or title of vicar
capitular. Besides the excommunication incurred by the chapters
and the person elected (see EXCOMMUNICATION, sub-title
Excommunications Pronounced or Renewed Since the Constitution
"Apostolica Sedis"), Pius IX imposes on "those
among them who have received the episcopal order a suspension
from the exercise of their pontifical powers and the interdict
against entering the church, pleno jure and without any
declaration."